Nasty crash in B’Ham

[anonymous-user]

del mar said:

RSK21 said:

del mar said:

Of course it didn't work, because you lock them up.

If however you "removed" all the petty criminals / persistent offenders crime rate would surely drop.

You would get to 4 strikes and then suddenly become a monk to avoid being put to death !!

For clarity are you saying you want to live in a society where five shoplifting convictions = extermination ?

A persistent scumbag will always be a so, they are just a drain on society why do we want them ?

We all make mistakes, but the same mistake 5 times ?

But no I am not really suggesting we kill people......

But we could let them kill each other in some form of modern day gladitorial games

[Steviesam]

La Liga said:

Steviesam said:

Greendubber said:

You have absolutely zero evidence to back that claim up.

In some respects it does not matter if there is evidence or not.

The general public see that twice (recently rape cases) plod have withheld evidence that later acquits the defendant. There can be no dependable reason for this. All trust is gone.

From my personal opinion, this kind of thing has been going on for years. I just CANT trust them to do the right thing.

Just a couple of reasons: they can never be bothered with "small" crimes, but these really affect the people involved. Time and time again we see less than perfect people let off with little or no punishment (maybe the courts can be blamed too). Lots of reports of people getting fined/points for (as an example) using a mobile, when they weren't.. Agreed some are lying, but not ALL of them, and it comes down to who will be believed in court, which is always going to be plod.

And before you say, I know not all are bad. But the trust has gone, and once thats gone, you doubt everyone.

Trust in professions has been measured for over 30 years.

Most occupations have remained similar over that time period with the exception of the clergy, which has declined. Similar with measures of confidence etc in policing data.

Seems your 'the trust has gone' melodrama isn't backed up by the evidence / indications.

As I said, I dont need to provide to find evidence to prove the way IFEEL

I maybe right or I maybe wrong regarding facts and evidence, its just my opinion.

[Wait Here Until Green Light Shows]

Greendubber said:

zarjaz1991 said:

Greendubber said:

You have absolutely zero evidence to back that claim up.

Which is quite the coincidence really, as it seems neither did the police.

Yawn, perhaps you could start your own thread about how much you hate the police rather than dragging this one off topic.

Sadly there are many videos available clearly showing the police are not always right.
Prime example here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91QaFedj-yw (this chap is one of the more normal people like you and I...there are plenty more people who admittedly goad the police and don't do themselves any favors but still correct)
I know we're all supposed to be good little citizens and trust in the Police 100%...but sadly standards are slipping (off a cliff it seems) and this is no longer the case.
Ideally you should always video any traffic police stops just in case.

[richie99]

Greendubber said:

Rovinghawk said:

Greendubber said:

I wasn't aware they were currently prosecuting anyone without evidence?

It seems that they occasionally forget to show the defence all the evidence, therefore costing more money in the long run.

Well you know as well as I do no one can be prosecuted with zero evidence, which is what the poster was claiming.

I'm well aware of the Mets disclosure fiasco.

Was there any actual evidence that the unfortunate gentleman charged with rape had actually committed an offence? Apart from the claims of a bitter woman.

Also I was reminded yesterday of the chap who was charged with sexual assault because he walked past a woman at Waterloo Station when he was interviewed on the radio. The only real evidence was CCTV which showed that he didn’t do it.

This is all for a different thread but I do not believe your claim that no one can be charged with zero evidence.

[ape x]

DuraAce said:

Shame we haven't got a special squad of 'police' who could just 'dissappear' people who were never going to make any useful contribution to society, in a sort of Judge Dredd/Punisher style.

(said in jest, but only just!)

OK but once all the politicians are gone...who do we get to run the country?

[anonymous-user]

richie99 said:

Greendubber said:

Rovinghawk said:

Greendubber said:

I wasn't aware they were currently prosecuting anyone without evidence?

It seems that they occasionally forget to show the defence all the evidence, therefore costing more money in the long run.

Well you know as well as I do no one can be prosecuted with zero evidence, which is what the poster was claiming.

I'm well aware of the Mets disclosure fiasco.

Was there any actual evidence that the unfortunate gentleman charged with rape had actually committed an offence? Apart from the claims of a bitter woman.

Also I was reminded yesterday of the chap who was charged with sexual assault because he walked past a woman at Waterloo Station when he was interviewed on the radio. The only real evidence was CCTV which showed that he didn’t do it.

This is all for a different thread but I do not believe your claim that no one can be charged with zero evidence.

Most rape files that go to the CPS get discontinued.

When they do go to court the conviction rate is about 6/10.

The CPS apply this to make a decision: https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/full-code-test

There are multiple safeguards once a matter goes to court if there isn't a realistic prospect of conviction.

[HTP99]

richie99 said:

Greendubber said:

Rovinghawk said:

Greendubber said:

I wasn't aware they were currently prosecuting anyone without evidence?

It seems that they occasionally forget to show the defence all the evidence, therefore costing more money in the long run.

Well you know as well as I do no one can be prosecuted with zero evidence, which is what the poster was claiming.

I'm well aware of the Mets disclosure fiasco.

Was there any actual evidence that the unfortunate gentleman charged with rape had actually committed an offence? Apart from the claims of a bitter woman.

Also I was reminded yesterday of the chap who was charged with sexual assault because he walked past a woman at Waterloo Station when he was interviewed on the radio. The only real evidence was CCTV which showed that he didn’t do it.

This is all for a different thread but I do not believe your claim that no one can be charged with zero evidence.

Earier on this year, my daughters then boyfriend (20) was charged with sexual assault of a minor (touching a 12 yo girl's clothed bottom), there was absolutely no evidence, however it went to a Magistrates court and then onto Crown Court last month for a 3 day trial, the jury took only 20 minutes to find him not guilty.

He lost his job and the whole saga changed his personality and his mum became very depressed over it all, fortunately he has a good family and absolutely no one believed he did what he was charged with and his previous employers (a leisure centre where the alleged incident happened) took him back.

[RicksAlfas]

alfaman said:

having recently moved from Singapore to Bahrain :

> indicators are optional
> lane changes are random
> red lights and speed limits are optional
> one way streets work either way
> and drink drive laws may not apply to' visitors' at weekend
> double parking is perfectly fine

This is my commute through Bradford.

[anonymous-user]

Wait Here Until Green Light Shows said:

Sadly there are many videos available clearly showing the police are not always right.
Prime example here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91QaFedj-yw (this chap is one of the more normal people like you and I...there are plenty more people who admittedly goad the police and don't do themselves any favors but still correct)
I know we're all supposed to be good little citizens and trust in the Police 100%...but sadly standards are slipping (off a cliff it seems) and this is no longer the case.
Ideally you should always video any traffic police stops just in case.

That guy seems incredibly unlucky with the law looking at the number of vids he posts

[Nickbrapp]

garyhun said:

But we could let them kill each other in some form of modern day gladitorial games

How about what China do, have a public trial, then a execution, they still manage to be civilised over there.

[herewego]

garyhun said:

Wait Here Until Green Light Shows said:

Sadly there are many videos available clearly showing the police are not always right.
Prime example here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91QaFedj-yw (this chap is one of the more normal people like you and I...there are plenty more people who admittedly goad the police and don't do themselves any favors but still correct)
I know we're all supposed to be good little citizens and trust in the Police 100%...but sadly standards are slipping (off a cliff it seems) and this is no longer the case.
Ideally you should always video any traffic police stops just in case.

That guy seems incredibly unlucky with the law looking at the number of vids he posts

Obviously not as normal as Wait Here thinks.

[greygoose]

herewego said:

garyhun said:

Wait Here Until Green Light Shows said:

Sadly there are many videos available clearly showing the police are not always right.
Prime example here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91QaFedj-yw (this chap is one of the more normal people like you and I...there are plenty more people who admittedly goad the police and don't do themselves any favors but still correct)
I know we're all supposed to be good little citizens and trust in the Police 100%...but sadly standards are slipping (off a cliff it seems) and this is no longer the case.
Ideally you should always video any traffic police stops just in case.

That guy seems incredibly unlucky with the law looking at the number of vids he posts

Obviously not as normal as Wait Here thinks.

Indeed, I have never felt the urge to video a conversation with anyone, a bit of contrition and being reasonable has been better in my experience of being stopped by the police, even with the California Highway Patrol who let me off with a warning which was nice and unexpected.

[Greendubber]

zarjaz1991 said:

Greendubber said:

Yawn, perhaps you could start your own thread about how much you hate the police rather than dragging this one off topic.

I'm sure the police would indeed be very happy if we all stopped mentioning their attempts at miscarriages of justice.

Im sure they will be more than happy for you to discuss what you like but if you stop frothing for a moment and read what I typed you'll see I suggested you do it in another thread, rather than detailing this one.

Oh well too late, congratulations.

[Greendubber]

HTP99 said:

richie99 said:

Greendubber said:

Rovinghawk said:

Greendubber said:

I wasn't aware they were currently prosecuting anyone without evidence?

It seems that they occasionally forget to show the defence all the evidence, therefore costing more money in the long run.

Well you know as well as I do no one can be prosecuted with zero evidence, which is what the poster was claiming.

I'm well aware of the Mets disclosure fiasco.

Was there any actual evidence that the unfortunate gentleman charged with rape had actually committed an offence? Apart from the claims of a bitter woman.

Also I was reminded yesterday of the chap who was charged with sexual assault because he walked past a woman at Waterloo Station when he was interviewed on the radio. The only real evidence was CCTV which showed that he didn’t do it.

This is all for a different thread but I do not believe your claim that no one can be charged with zero evidence.

Earier on this year, my daughters then boyfriend (20) was charged with sexual assault of a minor (touching a 12 yo girl's clothed bottom), there was absolutely no evidence, however it went to a Magistrates court and then onto Crown Court last month for a 3 day trial, the jury took only 20 minutes to find him not guilty.

He lost his job and the whole saga changed his personality and his mum became very depressed over it all, fortunately he has a good family and absolutely no one believed he did what he was charged with and his previous employers (a leisure centre where the alleged incident happened) took him back.

I have no idea about the evidence regarding the disclosure cases but having a partner who deals with rape & sexual assault victims and offenders it is notoriously difficult to get CPS to charge, don't forget it's the CPS that make the charging decision and not the police.
Having spoken with her about numerous jobs she has had when it's purely one word against the other they'll never see the inside of a court room.

Back on topic.... Heartfelt tributes from the families of 2 of the Audi occupants are in the local press. Funnily enough they're not being received all that well.

[Wait Here Until Green Light Shows]

garyhun said:

Wait Here Until Green Light Shows said:

Sadly there are many videos available clearly showing the police are not always right.
Prime example here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91QaFedj-yw (this chap is one of the more normal people like you and I...there are plenty more people who admittedly goad the police and don't do themselves any favors but still correct)
I know we're all supposed to be good little citizens and trust in the Police 100%...but sadly standards are slipping (off a cliff it seems) and this is no longer the case.
Ideally you should always video any traffic police stops just in case.

That guy seems incredibly unlucky with the law looking at the number of vids he posts

It's worth watching them to see how the Police behave when confronted with someone who (completely within their rights) stands up to them. They're a bunch of muppets in most cases.

[anonymous-user]

Wait Here Until Green Light Shows said:

I know we're all supposed to be good little citizens and trust in the Police 100%...but sadly standards are slipping (off a cliff it seems) and this is no longer the case.

Are they?

How are you drawing that conclusion?

[OddCat]

wjwren said:

DuraAce said:

Shame we haven't got a special squad of 'police' who could just 'dissappear' people who were never going to make any useful contribution to society, in a sort of Judge Dredd/Punisher style.

(said in jest, but only just!)

I seem to remember these guys firing thousands of bullets but no-one ever seemed to get shot

[Shamrock_]

La Liga said:

Wait Here Until Green Light Shows said:

I know we're all supposed to be good little citizens and trust in the Police 100%...but sadly standards are slipping (off a cliff it seems) and this is no longer the case.

Are they?

How are you drawing that conclusion?

Birmingham six?
Hillsborough?

[Greendubber]

Shamrock_ said:

La Liga said:

Wait Here Until Green Light Shows said:

I know we're all supposed to be good little citizens and trust in the Police 100%...but sadly standards are slipping (off a cliff it seems) and this is no longer the case.

Are they?

How are you drawing that conclusion?

Birmingham six?
Hillsborough?

Anything from this century?

[greygoose]

Shamrock_ said:

La Liga said:

Wait Here Until Green Light Shows said:

I know we're all supposed to be good little citizens and trust in the Police 100%...but sadly standards are slipping (off a cliff it seems) and this is no longer the case.

Are they?

How are you drawing that conclusion?

Birmingham six?
Hillsborough?

Still no progress on arresting anyone for the Jack the Ripper murders either.